INTRODUCTION FOR POLICY MAKERS

THERE ARE
ALTERNATIVES
A supplement to the handbook for preventing
unnecessary immigration detention
This handbook is designed for legislators, policy
makers and civil society wanting to know more
about alternatives to immigration detention.
International human rights laws and standards
make clear that immigration detention should be
used only as a last resort, in exceptional cases
after all other options have been shown to beinadequate in the individual case. However, there
is limited practical guidance available over how
this can be achieved systematically.
The International Detention Coalition’s(IDC) Handbook for preventing unnecessary
immigration detention aims to address thisgap. This handbook identifies and describes arange of mechanisms to prevent unnecessary
detention and outlines a number of possible
alternatives to detention. The pragmatic
approach adopted in this handbook is shaped by
the legitimate migration management concernsof governments. These concerns include

compliance with release conditions, timely caseresolution and cost, while minimizing harm andupholding individual rights and dignity.
Drawing on a number of international
examples – from countries such as Argentina,Belgium, Canada, Hong Kong, New Zealand,
the Philippines, Spain, Sweden and the United
Kingdom – the handbook outlines a new
approach to alternatives to detention: a 5-step
conceptual and practical framework, called
the Community Assessment and Placement(CAP) model.
The policies described in this handbook, asoutlined in the CAP model, are currently being
implemented in a range of countries to enforce
immigration law through mechanisms that do
not rely heavily on detention. Such targeted
enforcement provides a sophisticated responseto the diverse population of irregular migrants
and asylum seekers within national territories.

KEY FINDINGS OF NEW RESEARCH
The research1 focused on three key areas to assess the success of any alternative to detention
program; compliance, cost and health and wellbeing. A number of identified benefits for government,
the community and the individual, achieved by adopting preventative mechanisms and alternatives todetention, include:

Cost less than detention
For example: A cost saving of 93% wasnoted in Canada and 69% in Australia on
alternatives to detention compared todetention costs. In addition independent
returns in the EU and Australia save
approximately 70% compared toescorted removals.

Increase voluntary return and independent
departure rates
Examples in Canada, Australia and the US ofboth refused asylum seekers and irregularmigrants had return rates of between 60%
and 69%, while Sweden reported an 82%
rate of return from the community among
refused asylum seekers.

Reduce wrongful detention, litigation, overcrowding and long-term detention
For example: Wrongful detention has led to litigation, costly compensation and public criticism
in a range of countries including Australia, South Africa and the UK. For instance, court rulingsin Hong Kong required the government to demonstrate the reasons for detention, leading to anumber of policy changes including the introduction of individual case assessment.

The research found asylum seekers and irregular migrants rarely abscond while
awaiting the outcome of a status determination or other lawful process. They are better
able to comply with liberty or release conditions, or a negative final decision if they:
can meet their basic needs in the community; if they have been through a fair andefficient determination process; if they have been informed through the process,including legal advice and have been provided advice on all options to remain in thecountry legally and, if needed, supported to consider sustainable avenues to depart.

INTRODUCING CAP
Common factors that contribute to successfulcommunity-based programs include understanding
the diversity within the population of asylum
seekers and irregular migrants, as well as
understanding those contexts that promote goodoutcomes for a range of stakeholders. Individualcase and community assessment assists in making
informed decisions on appropriate placement, thesetting of conditions if required, and the provision
for basic needs, legal advice and individual casemanagement while awaiting a final outcome. These
factors are part of a 5-step conceptual and practicalframework, called the Community Assessment andPlacement model, which prevents and reduces thelikelihood of unnecessary detention and effectively
manages individuals in the community.

Maintain high rates ofcompliance and appearance
For example: A recent study collating
evidence from 13 programs found compliance
rates ranged between 80% and 99.9%.
For instance, Hong Kong achieves a 97%
compliance rate with asylum seekers or
torture claimants in the community, and in
Belgium, a pilot working with families facing
removal had an 82% compliance rate.

Improve client health and well being,
integration outcomes and respect humanrights obligations
For example: Appropriate management in
the community has been found to be more
likely to uphold human rights and support
wellbeing, improving ability to contribute
fully to society if residency is secured or toface difficult futures such as return.

THE CAP MODEL
Community Assessment and Placement model

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

1.
Presumedetention
is notnecessary

2.
Screen andassess theindividual caseNot detain
Open accommodation

3.
Assess thecommunitysetting

4.
Apply
conditions in
the community
if necessary

Conditional release
Alternatives to detention

5.
Detain only as
the last resort
in exceptional
cases
DetainLast resort
with review

PLACEMENT OPTIONS

1. R.Sampson, G.Mitchell and L.Bowring, There are alternatives: Handbook for preventing unnecessary immigration detention; IDC, 2011.

HOW TO USE THE CAP MODEL
The Community Assessment and Placement
model has been designed as a framework toassist governments in their exploration anddevelopment of alternatives to detention.
While governments deal with detention
and enforcement differently due to specificpolitical systems and differing asylum seeker andirregular migration experiences, there may bemechanisms within the model that work for anindividual country.
The CAP model can assist in framing
discussions and providing a sharedunderstanding of some of the issues, while thepractical examples of current implementation
demonstrate that reducing detention throughcommunity management is achievable andbeneficial for a range of parties. Althoughdesigned in this way, these five mechanisms
correspond to the steps that can be taken in

individual cases subject to or at risk of detention,
to ensure detention is only applied as a lastresort in exceptional cases.
For example: If authorities screen out anindividual from detention at Step 2, then theindividual is not detained and can be placed in
an open accommodation setting. In most cases
the first three steps will be sufficient to ensure
effective compliance. However, if individualand community assessments identify serious
concerns, then release into the community
may only be possible through an alternative
to detention placement involving additional
conditions, as shown at Step 4. Re-evaluation ineach case occurs at certain points, such as aftera negative decision on a status application orwhen a set review period is reached for people
in detention. It is not intended to imply that mostcases end in detention.

Use the Community Assessment and Placement model for targeted enforcement; to ensure detention is not wrongfuland used only where individually assessed as needed. CAP reduces the financial and human cost of
immigration detention and maximizes management and case resolution in the community.

Step 1.
Presume detention is notnecessary: CAP operates on
the basis of a presumption
against detention, and is a
safeguard against arbitrary
detention and ensuresthat detention is applied
only as a last resort. This
includes a presumption
against detention,detention as a last resort
and a mandate to explore
alternatives.

Step 2.
Screen and assesseach case individually:
Understanding
population’s subject toor at risk of immigration
detention throughindividual screening andassessment assists in theidentification of needs,
strengths, risks andvulnerabilities in eachcase. Screening includes
legal obligations, identity,
health and security checks,
vulnerability and individual
case factors, including
community ties.

Step 3.
Assess the community
context: Assessment of
the community context inorder to understand theindividual’s placementin the community andto identify any support
mechanisms needed sothat the person remains
engaged in immigration
proceedings. This includes
ability to meet basic
needs, legal advice,documentation and casemanagement.

Step 4.
Apply conditions torelease if necessary:
Further conditions such asreporting requirements
or supervision may beintroduced to strengthen
the community setting
and mitigate identifiedconcerns. This includes
individual undertakings,
monitoring, supervision,
intensive caseresolution and negative
consequences for noncompliance.

The CAP model is unique as it combines mechanisms to prevent unnecessary detention withstrategies for effective and humane case resolution in the community.

Step 5.
Detain only as the lastresort in exceptional
cases: If conditions areshown to be inadequate
in the individual case,detention in line withinternational standards
including judicial review
and of limited duration
may be the last resort.

STAGES IN EXPLORING AND IMPLEMENTING ALTERNATIVESAND PREVENTING UNNECESSARY DETENTION
Stage 1: Analyse the context
Assess current legislation, policy and practiceagainst international legal standards andidentified good practice examples relating tothe detention of refugees, asylum seekers andmigrants
Identify what available preventativemechanisms or alternatives exist but which
may be underutilized
Explore what alternatives can be tested
or expanded without changing existinglegislation
Identify policy gaps and legislation which may
require revision to ensure detention is a lastresort.
Stage 2: Assess the population
Undertake an analysis of populations subject
to or at risk of detention
Identify particularly vulnerable populations toprioritize in pilot or national programs.
Stage 3: Explore relevant models
Undertake a study visit to countries already
implementing preventative mechanisms andalternatives to detention
Undertake research studies and an analysis
of available local and national community
services and placement options.

Organize an expert roundtable and forums
to explore preventative mechanisms andalternatives relevant in the national and local
context.
Stage 4: Build partnerships
Develop partnerships with departments andagencies with expertise in community services,
case management and working with complex
cases, such as health, child protection andfamily services
Identify international organizations, NGO andcivil society groups to partner with, including
service and legal providers and religious
groups.
Stage 5: Start implementing
Develop local and national pilots andprograms in partnership with government
agencies, NGO service providers andinternational organizations
Undertake policy development and legislativereform on immigration detention and theimplementation of preventative mechanisms
and alternatives to detention
Monitor and evaluate the effectivenessof these programs and share learnings
and outcomes with relevant national andinternational stakeholders.

HOW THE INTERNATIONAL DETENTION COALITION CAN ASSIST:
BVS721^`]dWRSab`OW\W\U]\OZbS`\ObWdSab]W[[WU`ObW]\RSbS\bW]\O\R^`SdS\bObWdS
mechanisms
BVS721^`]dWRSabSQV\WQOZ^`]U`O[[ObWQ^]ZWQgO\RZSUOZOaaWabO\QS
BVS721QO\Q]\\SQbb]`SUW]\OZ\ObW]\OZO\RZ]QOZ<5=aO\RQWdWZa]QWSbgU`]c^aW\QZcRW\U
legal and service providers.
Contact Grant Mitchell IDC Director, for enquiries: gmitchell@idcoalition.org or +61 3 9999 1607.

International Detention CoalitionImmigration detention is a growing phenomenon of modern governance as governments strive to regulate growing cross-border migration and limit thenumber of migrants who do not have legal status on their territory. Detention capacity continues to expand despite well-established concerns that detention
does not deter irregular migrants; that it interferes with human rights; and is known to harm the health and wellbeing.
The International Detention Coalition brings together civil society organizations and individuals from more than 50 countries across the globe working
together to improve the human rights of detained refugees, asylum seekers and migrants. The Coalition undertakes research, training, advocacy and campaigninitiatives, with a focus on children in detention, conditions and monitoring of places of detention and promoting the use of alternatives to detention.
To find out more or download the handbook visit: www.idcoalition.org or email: info@idcoalition.org